Coley v. Floyd et al

Filing 132

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 109 126 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; granting [108-1] motion to dismiss voluntarily Mr. Coley's claims against ADC defendants Mr. Burl, Ms . Green, Mr. May, Ms. Jones, Ms. Harris, Ms. Kelley, and Mr. Hobbs; denying 104 motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order; denying 123 128 motions to disqualify Judge Young; granting 110 Dr. Floyd's motion for s ummary judgment and dismissing with prejudice Mr. Coley's claims against Dr. Floyd; granting Mr. Coley's 131 motion for copies; denying all other pending motions as moot; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from the order and judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 03/30/2015. (rhm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
ANTONIO DEMARION COLEY
ADC #92842
v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 2:12-cv-00160 KGB/HDY

MARYBETH FLOYD, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

The Court has received Proposed Findings and Recommendations from United States
Magistrate Judge H. David Young recommending that the Court grant plaintiff Antonio Demario
Coley’s motion to dismiss voluntarily his claims against the Arkansas Department of Correction
(“ADC”) defendants and deny Mr. Coley’s motion for preliminary injunction and temporary
restraining order (Dkt. No. 109). After careful consideration, the Court finds that the Proposed
Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their
entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects (Dkt. No. 109). The Court grants Mr. Coley’s
motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 108-1) and dismisses with prejudice Mr. Coley’s claims against
defendants Danny Burl, Paulette Green, Larry May, Denise Jones, Claudia Harris, Wendy
Kelley, and Ray Hobbs. The Court denies Mr. Coley’s motion for preliminary injunction and
temporary restraining order (Dkt. No. 104).
The

Court

also

has

received

from

Judge

Young

Proposed

Findings

and

Recommendations recommending that the Court grant the motion for summary judgment filed
by the remaining defendant, Dr. Marybeth Floyd (Dkt. 126). Mr. Coley has objected and moved
for Judge Young’s recusal or disqualification (Dkt. Nos. 123, 124, 127, 128, 130). Mr. Coley
asserts that Judge Young demonstrated prejudice and bias that requires his recusal by denying
Mr. Coley’s motion to strike the declaration of Dr. Joseph Hughes that Dr. Floyd submitted in

support of her motion for summary judgment and through various other prior adverse rulings. A
judge is required to disqualify himself “in any proceeding in which his impartiality might
reasonably by questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).

“The question is ‘whether the judge’s

impartiality might reasonably be questioned by the average person on the street who knows all
the relevant facts of a case.’” United States v. Dehghani, 550 F.3d 716, 721 (8th Cir. 2008)
(citation omitted). “A party introducing a motion to recuse carries a heavy burden of proof; a
judge is presumed to be impartial and the party seeking disqualification bears the substantial
burden of proving otherwise.” Pope v. Fed. Express Corp., 974 F.2d 982, 985 (8th Cir. 1992)
(citation omitted). “[A] federal judge has a duty to sit where not disqualified which is equally as
strong as the duty to not sit where disqualified.” Laird v. Tatum, 409 U.S. 824, 837 (1972)
(citations omitted).
“Adverse rulings, standing alone, do not establish judicial bias or prejudice, nor create a
reasonable question of judicial impartiality.” United States v. Oaks, 606 F.3d 530, 537 (8th Cir.
2010) (quoting United States v. Schwartz, 535 F.2d 160, 165 (2d Cir.1976)). Mr. Coley has
pointed to no evidence suggesting that any of Judge Young’s adverse rulings were motivated by
bias, and the Court sees no such evidence.

The Court finds no basis for Judge Young’s

disqualification and denies Mr. Coley’s motions to disqualify Judge Young.
Turning to the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in regard to the pending motion
for summary judgment, after carefully considering Mr. Coley’s objections and making a de novo
review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and
Recommendations should be, and hereby are approved and adopted in their entirety as this
Court’s findings in all respects (Dkt. No. 126). The Court grants Dr. Floyd’s motion for

2

summary judgment (Dkt. No. 110) and dismisses with prejudice Mr. Coley’s claims against Dr.
Floyd.
It is therefore ordered that:
1.

The Court grants Mr. Coley’s motion to dismiss voluntarily his claims against the

ADC defendants (Dkt. No. 108-1) and dismisses with prejudice his claim against Mr. Burl, Ms.
Green, Mr. May, Ms. Jones, Ms. Harris, Ms. Kelley, and Mr. Hobbs.
2

The Court denies Mr. Coley’s motion for preliminary injunction and temporary

restraining order (Dkt. No. 104).
3.

The Court denies Mr. Coley’s motions to disqualify Judge Young (Dkt. Nos. 123,

4.

The Court grants Dr. Floyd’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 110) and

128).

dismisses with prejudice Mr. Coley’s claims against Dr. Floyd.
5.

The Court grants Mr. Coley’s pending motion for copies (Dkt. No. 131).

6.

The Court denies as moot all other pending motions.

7.

The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from the order and judgment

dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith.
SO ORDERED this the 30th day of March, 2015.

______________________________
Kristine G. Baker
United States District Judge

3